J3/06-356r2
Date: 15 November 2006
To: J3
From: Dick Hendrickson
Subject: Clause 13 Misc. issues
References: J3/06-007R1, 06-333, 06-353
355:6 change "if POINTER" to "if and only if POINTER"
355:8 change "if POINTER" to "if and only if POINTER"
Editor, please make corresponding changes in the other cases
378:14 It makes no sense to allow the FINDLOC value to
be an array.
Insert "scalar and " after "shall be".
392:6 Why is IS_CONTIGUOUS limited to assumed-shape and
array pointers? Pages 87-88 give a whole list of
things that are contiguous. Many are obvious, but
we allow SQRT(0.) and LOGICAL(.TRUE.).
This subsumes paper 06-333 and possibly interacts with 06-353.
Delete " assumed-shape" and "or an array pointer.
-------------------
Items for which no action or edits are needed
361:27+ (the line does not appear to be numbered.) Does the "nor
shall Y..." clause apply to "Y shall not be present" or
to "If X is..."? The sentence makes sense either way.
RESPONSE: The sentence is clear, the nor clause applies to the
initial "If X is " phrase.
376:16 Does EXECUTE_COMMAND_LINE cause normal or abnormal
termination if the command itself causes the termination?
Something like EXECUTE_COMMAND_LINE('stop me at noon")
RESPONSE: No edits needed here. External interrupts are
likely to be abnormal terminations. but that is not a property
of EXECUTE_COMMAND_LINE.
376:23 This says that command lines are executed synchronously
if the processor doesn't support asynchronous execution.
Actually, it might not support command lines at all, and
adding "wait=.false." is unlikely to force it to.
Edit: delete "; otherwise...synchronously".
RESPONSE: The description of CMDSTAT covers this odd case.
384:3 None of the routines should cause undue anythings.
Implementers know what this is for.
Edit: Delete ", without undue overflow or underflow"
Make a similar deletion at [350:13-14] for ABS
410:8 As with HYPOT, they should do the right thing.
EDIT delete line 410:8
RESPONSE: in all three cases, the words clarify the intended
use of the functions and provide information for both the
user and implementer.
407:10-12 This paragraph describes the effects that the PURE
subroutine has on things that aren't its arguments.
MOVE_ALLOC can't be pure! This is probably a F2003
interp question, rather than a 2008 integration issue.
This also affects 339:13 and note 13.1.
RESPONSE: The standard allows pure subroutines to cause
pointers to change their status.